Untitled

Putaruru Press, Volume V, Issue 177, 24 March 1927, Page 3

Just outside the southern extremity of the Temuka borough is a notice board bearing the legend : “ Welcome to Temuka. Don’t fail to visit our beautiful Domain. Ideal place for picnics, camping and sports.” Unfortunately, the notice is rendered ridiculous by the addition of another notice tacked on beneath to one of the uprights, and which reads : “ Trespassers will be prosecuted,” this latter apparently being, a warning to trespassers on the track in the adjoining paddock. It looks as though the New South Wales family endowment schi urn. af - suming that the Upper House does not throw it out or materially amend it, will benefit materially ony a comparatively small section of the community after all (reports the Sydney correspondent of the Otago Daily Times). It is estimated that of the 330,000 heads of households in the State, 125.000, although married, have no children. They are definitely outside the scope of the Bill. There are 58,300 who have only one child, which means that they will get an extra 5s a week, if the child happens to be under 14 and the breadwinner is earning less than £364 a year. Those who have five dependent children and over constitute only about 6 per cent, of the total number of householders. The Government’s volte face over the Bill, at the last minute, shocked the Opposition into a bitter but fruitless attack. The Bill in its original form definitely excluded children who are the inmates of charitable institutions. Now it is seeking to bring them within the scheme. The attitude of the Opposition is that it is merely a sinister move by the Government to embody in the Statute Book, as an obligation by law, the principle of State aid to certain denominational institutions. That the Upper House will reject at least this proposal is not at all improbable, since-these children are already provided for, not by Act of Parliament, however, but under the Estimates.